Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Theoretical legal question
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tanis143" data-source="post: 3245896" data-attributes="member: 43724"><p>That's my point though. If the state of NY seeks to strip me of my fundamental right to be secure in person or possessions, then they need to take up that responsibility. That is the axis of my argument. These nanny blue states keep saying that their firearm laws are for our protection, yet when it comes to actively protecting us they refuse. I say its time to force them to either allow for self protection or to protect us directly. Maybe if that aspect was forced into view, the court would rule that the state (regardless of which one) either has to restore the right of self protection for visitors or they have to protect them directly. I would like to visit NY, there are a lot places that are down right beautiful (that is another aspect of West Point I miss, the Highland Falls area is spectacular). However, with today's issues, I won't travel unless I have my sidearm with me. And in several states my sidearm is not allowed (12+1 capacity).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tanis143, post: 3245896, member: 43724"] That's my point though. If the state of NY seeks to strip me of my fundamental right to be secure in person or possessions, then they need to take up that responsibility. That is the axis of my argument. These nanny blue states keep saying that their firearm laws are for our protection, yet when it comes to actively protecting us they refuse. I say its time to force them to either allow for self protection or to protect us directly. Maybe if that aspect was forced into view, the court would rule that the state (regardless of which one) either has to restore the right of self protection for visitors or they have to protect them directly. I would like to visit NY, there are a lot places that are down right beautiful (that is another aspect of West Point I miss, the Highland Falls area is spectacular). However, with today's issues, I won't travel unless I have my sidearm with me. And in several states my sidearm is not allowed (12+1 capacity). [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Theoretical legal question
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom